Zimbardo’s Experiment
Zimbardo’s experiment focused on demonstrating obedience and the effects of social institutions’ power on individuals’ behavior and conformity. The experiment’s aim was to test the hypothesis; conditions within the US prison system and the inhumane activities of prisoners and the guards being led by the values and behavior of the people in control (Gross, 2020). The individuals in control involve natural sadistic guards and the inmates defined by the antisocial character. Zimbardo wanted to find substantial evidence supporting the hypothesis involving psychological, social, and physical conditions present in the prisons. The focus was on the impact of the prison rather than blaming the individuals.
Method
Zimbardo recruited several participants through volunteers and newspaper advertisements for a session that would last two weeks. Out of 75 participants, only 24 participants were shortlisted, and they were physically and mentally stable. The individuals selected were never involved in any criminal activities (Kolb, Whishaw and Teskey, 2016). The sample constituted students from North America who were from middle-class families and were white. The guards behaved just as required allowing the prisoners certain privileges such as work, headcount, toilet privileges, and meals.
Findings
Flexibility and Compliance
As days passed, the reaction of the prisoners towards the guards changed as the aggressiveness of the guards kept on growing daily. For instance, guards would wake the prisoners at midnight and perform headcounts to disrupt them (Kolb, Whishaw and Teskey, 2016). The prisoners became helpless because of the situation and lost control of themselves. The social power defined everyone in the study, and some guards became authoritative and abusive (Gross, 2020). Most of the guards conformed to the power and began exerting the roles of prison guards. However, the prisoners rioted, which led to the end of the study experiment.
Identification
Zimbardo believed that the changes were because individuals were willing and ready to conform to stereotyped roles such as prison guards. The guards acted differently from their everyday life experience and conditions (Kolb, Whishaw and Teskey, 2016). This portrayed how the prison environment plays a significant role in transforming the behavior of guards to brutal aggressive.
Styles of Thinking Behavior
The deindividuation portrays the behavior of the guards as they are taken by the norms, which make them lose their responsibility and social identity. The environment, including the uniform and the learned helplessness, made the prisoners submit to the guards. However, the unpredicted nature of the guards made the prisoners give up with response (Kolb, Whishaw and Teskey, 2016). Zimbardo believed that the slipping of the participant was naturally made (Gross, 2020). Conformity tends to converge towards negative values such as oppression, abuse, and conflict.
Population Validity
The study does not have population validity because the sample used only constituted the white male students from the United States. This shows that it is impossible to apply the finding of the study to other groups such as Asians since Americans have an individualistic culture.
Ecological Validity
The study has a small ecological validity because the prisoners and the guards were given a role. The behavior of the participants may not have been influenced by the same conditions that lead to behavior change in real life (Gross, 2020). Therefore, the study results cannot be applied to the general population.
Evaluation
Zimbardo’s concluded that many people have a quick reaction and conform to the social roles even when the roles are against their moral principles. The situation and environment play a crucial role in abetting conformity as all the participants selected did not have the behaviors portrayed previously. The prison structure made the guards behave hostile and not because of their personality. The behavior change was very fast as the relationship between the guards and the prisoners deteriorated. The prisoners became dependent on the guards, which made the guards mock them. The guards required more submission from the prisoners, and they conformed because they were their only hope at the moment, as everything they needed depended on their decisions. Zimbardo believed that it was because of nature that everybody was conforming to the role they were given. The situation presented to the participants made them divert from their principles.
Moscovici’s Experiment
Aim of the Experiment
The aim of the Moscovici study was to identify the impact of a consistent minority group on the majority group.
Method
The study involved a blue/green color slide experiment where six participants were selected. Two of the participants were stooges, and four of them were naive. The naïve were given the majority role and the stooges the minority role. Before the onset of the experiment, the participants were tested for the color vision of which all of them passed. This was meant to roll out the majority claim of being color blind (Gross, 2020). The participants gave out the answers loudly on 36 different trials. On presentation of blue slides that differed on the brightness, the stooges consistently named it green, and the naïve participants followed the response.
Findings
Flexibility and Compliance
The experiment portrayed that minorities who are consistent tend to impact the decision or the judgment of the majority group. Despite the minority being few, their consistent behavior makes them influential (Passer and Smith, 2018). In experiments involving conformity, the impact of the majority is always evident (Gross, 2020). When a minority group adopts a unique, consistent response, there is a high likelihood that the majority group will have dispositional attribution where they believe whatever the minority group says
Identification
When a majority group is faced with an opposing view, they tend to comply based on the comparison. However, when the minority group is faced with opposing opinions, they tend to comply based on validation (Gross, 2020). The validation process focuses on understanding the message content with a change in attitude gradually and unconsciously.
Style of Thinking Behavior
Moscovici argues that majority group individuals think for a long time when an argument is presented by the minority group because it requires cognitive processing. He noted that a consistent minority is more successful than the inconsistent one (Kolb, Whishaw and Teskey, 2016). This is because consistency alters the decision of the majority in accordance with the minority perception.
Population Validity
Moscovici’s study used female participants who cannot represent the entire population because it lacks population validity. The generalization of the study to other groups is inappropriate because it only provides the behavior of females.
Ecological Validity
Moscovici’s study lacks ecological validity because the experiment was laboratory research. The participant selected are students who barely know each other and whom they may never meet. The task is artificial as the minority group involved in the study differs significantly from the usual minority group in society (Gross, 2020). For example, participants of green peace movements and women’s rights operate in varying settings with various constraints.
Evaluation
The minority group involves the individuals who are outcasted, ostracized, stigmatized, and oppressed. The majority groups are identified according to their size, power, treatment, opinion, group features, and condition. The Moscovici experiment explains the impact of the minority on the majority, where the minority group has a significant effect on changing the perception of the majority group in society. Consistency determines the success of the minority as the influence of the majority is based on the compliance of the public. The majority have the advantage of numbers, and they tend to honor and penalize based on approval and disapproval.
The functionality of the majority group usually pressures the minority, which makes them consistent with their views. Their influence is based on information rather than normative social influence, enabling the minority group to provide new information and ideas that force the majority to consider their views. They tend to convince the majority that their opinions are correct and crucial.
Reference List
Gross, R., 2020. Psychology The Science of Mind and Behaviour. 8th ed. London: Hodder Education.
Kolb, B., Whishaw, I. and Teskey, G., 2016. An introduction to brain and behavior. New York: Worth Publishers.
Passer, M. and Smith, R., 2018. Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour. 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill Australia.